"The Quartet expressed support for the international meeting on Israeli-Palestinian peace called for by President Bush in his July 16th statement. Principals discussed the meeting and agreed that it should be substantive and serious, providing support to the parties in their bilateral discussions and negotiations in order to move forward urgently on a successful path to a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza that will unite all Palestinians."

Now, in my finely-tuned ear, that statement is problematic.

First of all, it seems that even the struggle against the Zionist enemy hasn't managed, over the past 80 years and more, to unite the Arabs that prefer to refer to themselves as "Palestinians". (And please note, in this blog, there are no "Palestinians" and I shorten that to Pals.). So why should a state be successful?

In 1923, the Arabs resident in the area of the Jewish national home rejected a proposed representative council by the British and did not participate in the vote - only the Jews. Another "Parity" institution was rejected later. All territorial compromises likewise were ignored and shunned.

Secondly, it is my belief that a Pal. state will be the most serious security threat to Israel and its Jews short of an Iranian (or now Syrian) A-bomb.

Thirdly, dear Mr. Ban, can we at least mention peace once an a while in close proximity to this idea of a Pal state? Like the whole idea of this, excuse my bluntness, idiocy of a Pal. state is theoretically supposed to bring about peace?